Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Reverse Domain Name Hijacking as a Registration Abuse

[Roland Perry <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In message 
<20090901095444.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e4672b37a5.wbe@xxxxxxxxx
ureserver.net>, at 09:54:44 on Tue, 1 Sep 2009, James M. Bladel 
<jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes
> My only remaining question is one of scope:  Under what circumstances
> would Reverse Hijacking (which is an abuse of process governing existing
> names) be considered a "registration" abuse, versus a
> "post-registration" or "use" abuse?
I've lost track of whether we decided that the only time there can ever 
be registration abuse is the instant a domain is first registered. (If 
we have, it certainly clears the decks).
But I would argue that the instant of invoking a dispute resolution 
process to change a domains registration under duress should also 
qualify.
And now I'm thinking along these lines, maybe activating any process to 
transfer a domain - what if someone is duped into making a transfer 
(maybe that's also one of the forms of 'theft' spoken of before) should 
be able to be scrutinised under our remit.
--
Roland Perry